From 64452b860ebd7142bc2b97c81645a388e74ffe02 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: inference Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 11:34:07 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Add headings for each issue. Change source link targets to Git issue comments rather than only the Git issues. --- blog/systemd-insecurity.html | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/blog/systemd-insecurity.html b/blog/systemd-insecurity.html index 64660d0..cfafc80 100644 --- a/blog/systemd-insecurity.html +++ b/blog/systemd-insecurity.html @@ -19,23 +19,29 @@

systemd Insecurity


Posted: 2022-01-29 (UTC+00:00)

-

Updated: 2022-10-29 (UTC+00:00)

+

Updated: 2022-11-14 (UTC+00:00)



Anyone who cares about security may want to switch from systemd as soon as possible; its lead developer doesn't care about your security at all.


+
+

Issue #0 - Against CVE Assignment

+

Poettering:
"You don't assign CVEs to every single random bugfix we do, do you?"


My thoughts:
-Yes, if they're security related.

+Yes, if they're security-related.


Source:
-https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/5998

+systemd GitHub Issue 5998




+

Issue #1 - CVEs Are Not Useful

+

Poettering:
"Humpf, I am not convinced this is the right way to announce this. We never did that, and half the CVEs aren't useful anyway, hence I am not @@ -49,19 +55,25 @@ found and their severity, so yes, it *is* the correct way to announce it. It seems as if over 95 security-concious people think the same.


Source:
-https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/6225

+systemd GitHub Issue 6225




+

Issue #2 - Security is a Circus

+

Poettering:
"I am not sure I buy enough into the security circus to do that though for any minor issue..."


Source:
-https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5144

+systemd GitHub Issue 5144




+

Issue #3 - Blaming the User

+

Poettering:
"Yes, as you found out "0day" is not a valid username. I wonder which tool permitted you to create it in the first place. Note that not permitting @@ -73,7 +85,7 @@ to generate invalid configuration. Hence, yes, it's a feature that we don't permit invalid user names, and I'd consider it a limitation of xinetd that it doesn't refuse an invalid username.

-So, yeah, I don't think there's anything to fix in systemd here. I< +So, yeah, I don't think there's anything to fix in systemd here. I understand this is annoying, but still: the username is clearly not valid."


My thoughts:
@@ -81,7 +93,8 @@ systemd was the thing that allowed root access just because a username started with a number, then Poettering blamed the user.


Source:
-https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237

+systemd GitHub Issue 6237